• Announcements

    • Keelah

      Moderation Team   04/18/2016

      Senior Staff admin Keelah socrates ; Otto Pilot Sentinel Sword of Estel Forum Team
      led by the Senior Forum Mod Tadzio ; unbiased modXena of Amphipolis ; Que Sera Sera
      Mithrandir Wyatt Earp Game Team
      led by the Senior Game Mod Mithrandir Mithrandir
      denotes Senior Staff on both Forum and Game Teams.
    • Keelah

      Open National RP Community Guidelines   04/18/2016

      Open National RP Rules and Guidelines First and foremost--ALL REGULAR FORUM RULES APPLY in addition to the RP guidelines. Read them. Learn them. Live them. These guidelines apply ONLY in Open National RP and its subforums.       PREFACE     Open National RP is a retreat from alliance politics for those looking to do more traditional roleplaying. Open National RP roots you firmly as a national leader, or other figure on a national level acting out a scenario that may or may not be taking place in-game (see below). This forum is not for trade requests or tech deals! Please refer to this forum for those activities. Foreign aid requests are not for this forum; they go here.   DEFINITIONS     Roleplay - Roleplay is acting, speaking, or playing in any manner that doesn't reflect you the player. Roleplay is make believe. It's fiction at its finest. It's not real. Therefore, anything you roleplay does not happen in real life. It has no effect on the game mechanics at all, it is simply used to amplify the experience of you, the player on this site. In Character (IC) - In Character means that the player is speaking as the leader of their nation or some other citizen of the fictional Cyber Nations world. Anything said is spoken from the viewpoint of that character and has no bearing on the player's emotions or feelings in real life. Forums labeled as In-Character within the Open National RP Forum must adhere to this posting style. References to game mechanics, forums, IRC, and anything "real world" are NOT permitted. A degree of OOC commentary is permissible so long as it does not make up the majority of your post, and only given that it is labeled with an "OOC:" designation. Out of Character (OOC) - Out of Character means the player is speaking as themselves, a human sitting at a computer, playing a game. As this posting style is "beyond the game" it is expected that players will treat it as such and not bring personal feuds or broader conflicts into OOC forums. References prohibited in IC forums are permissible here within the limits of the forum rules. Meta-Gaming - Meta-gaming is when a player uses RP information gathered OOC for IC advantage. For instance, when two players roleplay private communications they are private and other players' knowledge of them non-existent; they therefore cannot be acted upon. In essence it is the usage of knowledge or material that are not a part of the player's character's own backstory and roleplay experience. Meta-gaming is not permitted in the IC subforums.   THE FORUMS     Open National RP - This is an OOC forum. This forum serves as the primary OOC base point for all roleplay threads contained in the subforums. Commentary, discussion of individual RP rules, and other OOC threads where no roleplaying is actually taking place go in this forum. Threads that are not OOC will be promptly moved by moderators to the appropriate area. Please remember that OOC threads not having to do with Cyber Nations or roleplay go in The Water Cooler. Announcements and reminders from the moderation staff will be made in this forum. Game-related RP - This is an IC subforum. Game-related RP is for the acting out / roleplay of events that are happening in-game, such as spying operations, trade and aid sanctions, or wars between nations. While events that are being roleplayed may or may not be related to happenings in the Open World RP political community it is up to the creator(s) of the RP to determine the parameters of the RP and either link to the relevant OOC thread(s) located in Open National RP, or otherwise make them clear under an "OOC:" labeled section what those parameters are. Remember that as this is an IC forum NO references to game mechanics, forums, IRC, and anything "real world" are permitted. Fantasy RP - This is an IC subforum. Fantasy RP is for the more hardcore roleplayers that seek to create a world separate from the alliance-oriented political arena of Open World RP. Fantasy RPs are given a great deal of freedom in their own governance: the degree to which they are tied to the game is mostly up to the RP's creator(s). Remember, however, that all RPs tied to actual in-game events such as ongoing wars, trade sanctions, etc. belong in Game-related RP. As with Game-related RP it is up to the RP's creator(s) to determine the parameters of the RP and either link to the relevant OOC thread(s) located in Open National RP, or otherwise make them clear under an "OOC:" labeled section what those parameters are. Remember that as this is an IC forum NO references to game mechanics, forums, IRC, and anything "real world" are permitted.   SUBJECT CONTENT     The depiction of brutally inhumane acts, ethnic cleansing, and sexually explicit engagements or material, in image or text form, is strictly prohibited. Please remember in accordance with the forum rules that backseat moderating and mention/discussion of moderation issues in these forums is prohibited. Phrases such as "in before lock" and the like is prohibited. The unauthorised publishing of alliance nation guides is prohibited. The posting of any person's real life or personal information is strictly prohibited. All content is subject to moderator action/removal as is your account in accordance with the above and the forum rules. If you are unsure of the legality of something you wish to post, contact a moderator.   AUTHOR'S RIGHTS     Author's rights applies ONLY in the two IC RP subforums and ONLY there. They are relevant in no other area on the Cyber Nations Forums. Locks - As the author of a thread, you are entitled to request a lock for your thread. A simple post with said request will suffice, as will a private message to a moderator, or a thread in Report Forum Abuse. Closed RPs - Thread authors in the roleplay forums may restrict their RP to a select group of posters specified by forum name. This must be done in the original post and clearly labeled. Thread authors may not make blanket statements prohibiting or allowing only certain groups, alliances, or entities posting rights. Closed RPs MUST be done as above. Post Removal - Authors may request that specific posts be deleted from their RP threads when a user posts in conflict with a designated closed RP.   MODERATOR INTERVENTION IN ROLEPLAY     The moderation staff will take a hands-off approach to all roleplay affairs. Unless a poster is in violation of the forum rules or the guidelines outlined here no official action will be taken. Governance of individual RPs and their specific guidelines will be left to the RP creator(s) and the participants of the RP. However, where there is a dispute of the validity of the actions of a user or users a request may be sent via PM to an appropriate member of the moderation staff (see here) to make a non-binding objective judgment. Even after such a judgment it remains the responsibility of the participants to come to a resolution. Always remember that if there are irreconcilable differences you may always start new/separate RPs.   HELPFUL LINKS       The Forum Rules. Again. All About Admins And Moderators - Who To PM For What How To Report Forum Rule Violations  
    • Keelah

      Cyber Nations Forum Rules   04/18/2016

      Cyber Nations Forum Rules  
      In the process of registering on this forum, all players--including you--agreed to accept these terms and conditions and the terms and conditions of Invision Power Board. In doing so you essentially signed an electronic contract pledging to have read the rules and TOS and agreeing to follow the rules and TOS as written. It is your continued responsibility to read, follow, and keep up-to-date with the CN rules.
      The following are basic guidelines for use of the Cyber Nations community forum. Anyone caught disobeying these guidelines will be issued a warning. The forum staff works on a five warn limit policy unless the situation calls for more appropriate action ranging from a verbal warning to a double warn and suspension to an immediate ban, etc.   Just because something is not listed specifically here as illegal does not mean it's allowed. All players are expected to use common sense and are personally responsible for reading the pinned threads found in the Moderation forum. Questions regarding appropriateness or other concerns can be sent via PM to an appropriate moderator.   A permanent ban on the forums results in a game ban, and vice versa. Please note that the in-game warn system works on a "three strikes you're out" policy and that in-game actions (including warnings and deletions) may not be appealed. For more information regarding in-game rules please read the Cyber Nations Game Rules.   1.) First Warning
      2.) Second Warning
      3.) Third Warning (48 hour suspension at the forum)
      4.) Fourth Warning (120 hour suspension at the forum)
      5.) Permanent Ban   Game Bans and Forum Bans
      If you receive a 100% warn level on the forums, you will be subject to removal from the forums AND have your nation deleted and banned from the game at moderator(s) discretion.   If you are banned in the game, then you will be banned from the forums.   Process of Appeals
      Players may not appeal any in-game actions. This includes cheat flags, canceled trades, content removals, warn level increases, nation deletion, and bans from the game.   Players may appeal individual forum warnings. You may only appeal a warning if you can show with evidence that it was unwarranted or unduly harsh. If a reasonable amount of time has passed (no less than one month and preferably longer) in which you have demonstrated reformed behavior than you may request a warning level reduction. Wasting staff time with inappropriately filed reports and/or unfounded appeals will result in a warn level raise. Repeat incidences will result in a ban from the forum.   Bans are permanent. Banned players may appeal to the Senior Staff if they believe grounds exist (very, very rare) in which they state their case with evidence and why explain why they believe they deserve to be allowed back into Cyber Nations. This process is not quick and the investigation into cases may last three minutes or three weeks or more depending on the individual situation.   The only place where discussion of moderator action is acceptable is in the appropriate Moderation forum. Posting commentary on or disagreement with moderator action elsewhere will result in a warn level raise.   Posting
      All posts must be in English. Common phrases in other languages will be allowed so long as they are translated upon request. Foreign languages are permitted in signatures and avatars, however.   Certain areas of the forum require you to have a nation in either standard CN or CN:TE. If you have...   A SE and a TE nation: You get one forum account. Your forum account name must match your SE nation or ruler name. You are allowed to post in either SE or TE areas of the forum. You must have your CN:TE nation name listed in your profile to post in the CN:TE section of the forum.
      Just an SE nation: You get one forum account. Your forum account name must match your SE nation or ruler name. You are not allowed to post in any TE areas of the forum.
      Just a TE nation: You get one forum account. Your forum account name must match your TE nation name or ruler name. Your must have your CN:TE nation name listed correctly in your profile. You are not allowed to post in any of the SE areas. You are allowed to post in the water cooler, question center and the moderation forums. Other than that, all your posts need to stay in the TE area.   Flame/Flamebait/Trolling
      Flaming is expressing anger or lobbing insults at a person/player rather than a character, post, idea, etc. Flamebait are posts that are made with the aim of targeting/harassing/provoking another user into rule-breaking. Trolling is submitting posts with the aim of targeting/harassing/provoking a specific group into rule-breaking. Forum users should not be participating in any of these, and doing so will result in a warning.   Topic Hijacking
      Hijacking is forcing the current thread discussion off of the original topic and usually results in spam or flame from either side. Forum users found hijacking threads will be given a warning.   Repeat Topics
      One topic is enough. Repeat topics will be locked, removed, and the author given a warning. Users found creating repeat topics after others were locked by staff will receive a warn raise.   Joke Topics
      Topics created as a joke are prohibited. Joke topics will be locked and the author warned. This includes topics in which the author is making an announcement “for” another in-game alliance. Humorous threads are permitted; it is up to the discretion of the moderation staff to determine what is merely satire and what is actually a joke topic.   Spam
      Spam is defined as creating posts or topics containing only contentless material of any kind. Users found spamming will receive a warning. Examples include (but are in no way limited to) posts containing nothing but smilies, "+1", "QFT", "this" any other one/few-word contentless combination, joke threads, or posts containing quotes and anything that counts as spam by itself. Adding words to a post with the express intent of avoiding a spam warn will result in a warning. These posts and other similar contributions have no substance and hence are considered spam. Posts of "Ave", "Hail" or any other one word congratulatory type are acceptable as one word posts. Emoticon type posts such as "o/" without accompanying text is still not allowed. Posts containing only images are considered spam, unless the image is being used in the Alliance Politics sub-forum and then the actual text of the image be placed into spoiler tags.   Posting in All Caps
      Posting large amounts of text in capital letters is not permitted. Use discretion when using your caps lock key.   No Discussion Forums
      There are forums that are not for discussion and are used strictly for game and forum staff to address certain issues, bugs, etc. The following forums are not open to discussion: Report Game Abuse, Report Forum Abuse, and Warn/Ban Appeals. Only moderators and the original poster may post in a thread, period, with absolutely no exceptions. Users found disobeying this guideline will receive an automatic warning for each offense.   Moderation Forums
      All Moderation forums also maintain pinned threads clearly marked as required reading before posting. Failure to read and follow required reading and procedure in a Moderation forum will result in a warning. Examples include posting requests in the wrong forum, failure to include all required information in posts, etc. The standard of conduct and enforcement of rules in Moderation forums is strictly enforced and the repercussions for disregarding rules or disrespecting staff are harsh. Read the pinned threads before posting and you will be fine.   Namecalling
      Excessive or unqualified namecalling is not allowed in IC forums; namecalling should also never make up the bulk of a post. Namecalling is prohibited entirely in all OOC forums.   Filtered Words
      Any attempts to evade the word filter will result in a warning. The terms we have filtered are filtered for a reason and no excuse for evasion will be accepted. Filter evasion includes censoring or deliberately misspelling part of a filtered word.   If you link to a website, image, video, etc., containing profanity, please post a disclaimer before the link. The moderation staff may still remove links if the content is deemed too obscene.   Harassment
      Forum users should not be stalking/harassing others on the forums. Anyone found stalking players from topic to topic, etc., will be subject to a warning.   Gravedigging
      Gravedigging is not allowed anywhere on the forums. Gravedigging is "bumping" old topics which haven't been active for quite some time (four to seven days is standard depending on the nature of the thread and how many pages back it had been pushed before bump). Your warn level will be raised if you are caught doing this.   The Suggestion Box and Black Market forums are partial exceptions to this rule. Suggestions/ideas in that forum may be posted in regardless of age PROVIDING that the reviving post contains constructive, on-topic input to the original topic or discussion. Black Market threads may be bumped by the author if there is new information about the offered exchange (i.e open aid slots). In the Player Created Alliances forum it will not be considered gravedigging to bump a topic up to a year old, so long as the alliance in question still exists and it is not a duplicate thread.   Signatures
      Those who fail to read and abide by these rules will have their signatures removed and receive a warning.   You may have only one image per signature which may not exceed the maximum size of 450 pixels wide by 150 pixels tall. You may have no more than 8 lines of text and text size cannot exceed size 4. Each quote-tag, image and empty line count as a line.   Inappropriate Images and Other Disallowed Images
      Images that are sexual in nature or have sexual overtones are prohibited. It is up to the discretion of the moderation staff to determine what constitutes sexual overtones. Depictions of kissing are permissible provided there are no sexual implications. Images depicting female nipples are prohibited outright.   Making “ASCII art” is prohibited regardless of the image depicted.   Using photos or likenesses of another Cyber Nations player is also prohibited.   Drug References
      Images and posts promoting illegal drug use are prohibited. References to drugs are acceptable only if the moderation staff deems that it is not promoting the use thereof.   Obscene Content and/or "Account Suicide"
      Anyone caught posting vulgar material (including but in no way limited to pornography, "gross," "tubgirl," "lemonparty," photos depicting RL illegal acts such as violence towards humans or animals, child pornography, death photos, and any other obscene or offensive material in either text form or picture form) will have their account(s) permanently banned, and their ISP contacted along with any other applicable internet and RL authorities.   OOC Threats / Revealing Personal Information
      An OOC threat of any nature will equate to an automatic ban from the game and forums. Likewise, the publishing of personal information of any other player without their explicit permission is grounds for warning and/or a ban from the game depending on the severity of the offense.   Death Threats / Death Wishes
      A death threat or a death wish of any nature (including but not limited to telling another player to commit suicide) will result in at very least a 40% warn level increase and 2 day suspension from the forums, with harsher punishments, including a complete ban from the forums and game, up to the discretion of the moderation staff.   Quoting Rulebreaking Posts
      Do not quote any post with obscene content or any other content that has to be removed by the moderation staff. Doing so makes it more difficult for the moderation staff to find and remove all such content and will result in a warn level increase. Putting rulebreaking posts of any kind in your signature is prohibited.   Forum Names
      With the exception of moderator accounts, all forum accounts must match up exactly with the ruler name or nation name of your in-game country. Those found not matching up will be warned and banned immediately. Forum account names may not be profane or offensive.   Multiple Forum Accounts
      With the exception of moderators, if you are caught with multiple forum accounts, the multiple account(s) will be banned, warn level raised, and your identity will be announced by a moderator to the CN community so rule-abiding players can take IC action against you. Multiple forum account offenders will receive a varying percentage warn level raise and/or a permanent ban on a case-by-case basis.   Posting For Other Players
      Posting for banned or suspended players is prohibited, as is posting for any person without a nation. This includes making warn and ban appeals on their behalf.   Imitation &. Impersonation
      Imitation in terms of this forum is mimicking the posting, avatar, or signature styles of another user in an attempt to be satirical or generally humorous. Impersonation in terms of this forum is copying the posting, avatar, or signature styles of another user in order to present the illusion that the person is in fact that user. Imitation is fine and can be quite funny. Impersonation is disruptive and is warnable. Please pay attention to the subtle difference between these two concepts.   A player may not impersonate another player by emulating the characteristics of someone else's past or present account in an attempt to harass, stalk, or flamebait. Creating a new forum account in an attempt to impersonate a standing account will result in deletion and banning without notice.   Any attempt at imitation and/or impersonation of moderators and game staff is strictly prohibited and will be met with harsh repercussions.   Avatars
      Size for avatars is limited by the forum mechanics, therefore there is no size issue for a user to worry about. Avatars must be in good taste, and any avatar containing a picture that is too violent, disgusting, sexually explicit, insulting to another player or staff member, etc. will be removed. Avatars that are potentially seizure inducing will not be permitted. Players may not "borrow" the avatars of any moderator past or present without permission.   Swastikas and Nazi Imagery
      The swastika may not be used in signatures or avatars. Pictures of swastika's are acceptable for use in the In Character (IC) sections of the roleplay forums, so long as its context is In Character, and not Out Of Character. Pictures of Hitler, mentioning of the Holocaust, etc... have no place in the roleplay forums, since these people and events existed in real life, and have no bearing or place in the Cyberverse. Other Nazi or SS imagery is forbidden in all forums.   Moderation Staff
      The revealing of the private identities of any Cyber Nations staffers past or present is strictly prohibited, and thus no speculation/accusation of identity is allowed. Doing so is grounds for moderator action against your account appropriate to the offense, including a full forum/game ban.   Claims of moderator bias should be directed to the highest level of authority--the Head Game & Forum Mod/Admin, Keelah. Claims of moderator bias without supporting evidence is grounds for a warning.   Blatant disrespect of the moderator staff is strictly prohibited. This includes but is not limited to spoofing moderator accounts in any way, sig/avatar references, baiting, flaming, rude demands, mocking, attitude, and unsubstantiated claims of bias. They are volunteers hired to enforce the rules. If you have a problem with the way a moderator is enforcing the rules or the rules themselves please contact Keelah.   Attempting to use the moderation staff as a weapon by abusing the report system in an attempt to get another player warned or banned is strictly prohibited.   Do not ask about becoming or campaign to become a moderator. The moderators are drawn from CN membership but moderation positions are by invitation only. Asking to become one will substantially decrease your chances of ever being asked.   Aiding Rule Violators
      Any user found to know of a serious rule violation without reporting it to a game moderator (eg. knowledge of a user with multiple nations) will be given a warning or, in more serious cases, have their nation deleted.   Aiding Banned Players
      Any user found to be harboring, aiding or otherwise knowingly helping a banned user will be deleted. This includes knowing of their existence within the game without reporting it to the game-moderation staff.   Questionable Actions and Content
      The forum rules are not designed to cover every scenario. Any action that is seen to be counter-productive or harmful to the forum community may be met with moderator action against your account. The Cyber Nations Moderation Staff reserves the right to take action against your account without warning for any reason at any time.   Private Transactions
      Nation selling and other private transactions via such auction sites like eBay is against the Cyber Nations terms and conditions. While our moderators cannot control what people do outside of the game you are not allowed to promote such private exchanges on our forums without expressed permission from admin only. Anyone found to be engaging in such activity without permission will be banned from the game.   Advertising
      Advertising other browser games and forums is prohibited. Soliciting donations towards commercial causes is also prohibited. If you wish to ask for donations towards a charitable cause, please contact a moderator before doing so.   Extorting Donations
      Donations are excluded from any kind of IC payment. Anyone found extorting others for OOC payments will be warned in-game and/or banned.   Third Party Software
      Third party software is not allowed to be advertised on these forums by any means (post, signature, PM, etc). These programs can easily be used to put malware on the user's computer, and as such can cause huge security issues. Anybody who is caught spreading links to these will at the very least have their warning level increased.   Other Forum Terms & Rules   Please take a moment to review these rules detailed below. If you agree with them and wish to proceed with the registration, simply click the "Register" button below. To cancel this registration, simply hit the 'back' button on your browser.   Please remember that we are not responsible for any messages posted. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. USE THE WEB SITE AT YOUR OWN RISK. We will not be liable for any damages for any reason. THIS WEB SITE IS PROVIDED TO YOU "AS IS," WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED.   The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of this bulletin board. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact us immediately by email. We have the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary.   You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this bulletin board to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law.   You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this bulletin board.
Centurius

The GM's Court

2,957 posts in this topic

Note: The GMs want this to be an active, involved Court. Without community involvement we will not have community resolvement. Anyone can post here at will as long as it has to do with rules or disputes.

Definition of a GM

As hawk began in his own definition, the Game Masters (GMs) are CNRP players appointed by the Cyber Nations Forums moderating staff to apply the CNRP community rules. They represent the moderation staff within CNRP. GM's do not create rules, as they are not a triumvirate (or a duumvirate, or an autocrat). However, the rules can be ambiguous, as in reality they are not a centralized set of policies, but a loose network of customs, procedures, written and unwritten guidelines, and to some degree precedents. Many disputes within CNRP, as it is a competitive atmosphere, arise from this ambiguity. Therefore to apply the rules, the duty of interpretations is also left to the GM. Hawk himself described this by referring to the GM as a judge or an arbiter. This is a functional and a reasonable definition, so I continue to maintain it. It is from this definition, that scope and the role of the GM can be derived.

Sitting GM's:
Cemturius

The Shammy Socialist

Tidy Bowl Man


Dispute Resolution

If a dispute occurs, be it a disagreement in the rules, disagreement in interpretation, claims of abuse, or any other incident whereby one party feels wronged by another the first step which should be attempted is a private negotiation between the two sides. This can be carried out however one sees fit (formal, informal, pm, query, thread post ect). The point of this is to get the two adversaries talking and to see if some sort of common ground can be reached without the need out outside intervention. Often this can be mutually beneficial as it does not always have to strictly conform to the rules of CNRP and the complexities and rigidity of the structure of rules often cannot make room for the circumstantial details of each case.

If negotiation fails, then please post in this thread (the GM court) linking specifically to the relevant posts which the dispute concerns. Provide a short description of the dispute. At this point the evaluating GM can examine the situation and if the verdict seems apparent, they can make a ruling prior to any case. (Example 1: someone deploy's a giant space laser to attack ground targets. Clearly this is outlawed and there is firm precedent to establish it, no drawn out case is necessary. Example 2: Someone overtly godmodes, it is fairly established what godmoding is no drawn out process is required. Example 3: Someone Rp's in your territory without your permission, again obvious and clearly illegal.) If however, the verdict is not apparent, a new thread will be opened by a GM to address the dispute, you, the initiator will be given the opportunity to provide the absolute best possible argument for why you think you are correct. It is your responsibility to provide us with the facts, evidence, logical appeals, and other appeals that supports your side. After this post the other person should compile the best case they possibly can supporting their side. They should also address errors in their opponents and in general refute the other side thoroughly. The person who initiated GM resolution will then be given a chance to respond to the refutation of their case and to refute the case of the second party. At this point third parties to the dispute who would like to make input are welcome to jump in and the original parties can continue to defend and attack eachother's positions. The GM who opened the topic will review this thread and render a decision (based on the arguments made and the evidence provided) in the GM court providing reasoning for the decision. This decision will be generally final, except within extreme cases where the decision itself is so beyond any level of justification that no rational individual could have condoned it. In such cases the other non-participating GM's may initiate a community poll to overturn the ruling.

Should the initiator or second party refuse to participate in the dispute resolution process, a decision will still be made on the basis of the participating party's posts, as well as any third party input. In such a case the non-participating party has foregone their opportunity to present their case to us. If they do not like the decision that comes back, we cannot be blamed or faulted for whatever impact the lack of their input has. Our decision will not necessarily be a default judgement favoring the participating side, but we will in all likelihood lack the full details of the non-participants side, (as only they fully know the details of what they posted).

If the GM`s see a violation of the rules that nobody comes forward about, then it is still up to the GM`s to fix said violation. Some of us in the community favor proactive GM`s and others favor laid-back ones, and for all intents and purposes you get the best of both worlds with the current, sitting GM`s.


Outcome Determination

Types of Outcome:
Affirmation: Agreement with initiator.
Negation: Agreement with the second party.
Double Negation: Disagreement with both parties.

Result (prescription):
Wiping of actions deemed illegal thus resolving the dispute.
Upholding of the disputed actions leaving the status quo as it is.
Designating an award which resolves the dispute.

Most of the disputes involving GM's require the employment of their interpretive powers. To make this process (at least for myself) more transparent these are the three core questions I ask myself and I attempt to determine when weighing a decision.

1) Is the meaning apparent in the formulation of the rule? In other words is its meaning obvious.

2) Is there a precedent for this case? Beyond that is this precedent fair and reasonable? I find tradition to personally be a deplorable justification for doing anything. As humans our history has been one of various parties mastering and dominating one another, though the way in which we go about this has become increasingly more abstract and complicated our history is littered with death, slavery, and 'injustice'. So before I pass the buck to my predecessors I do always check to see if the precedent in question is equitable. It is also worth noting that the GM who made the decision may have been narrowly focused and that they did not or could not predict the ultimately uses and results of their original ruling. Context is important so I consider that as well.

3)If no such meaning is obvious, and if no reasonable precedent is available, I simply assess what the best interpretation would be.

Compilation of GM/Moderator Rulings

1. Custom aircraft: 1) All custom aircraft used in combat must have stats accompanying them which are reviewable and accessible before they are used in combat. These stats must be reasonably comprehensive.
2) All custom aircraft which are employing yet to be serviced technology must be defendable by some semi-mature science and links which can show there is a reasonable chance to see it in production service by your tech year capped of course at 2031.
3) While all aspect ultra stealth aircraft and hypersonic aircraft are feasible by advanced nations, it is not feasible to have aircraft that do both of these "near perfect"
4) No uber cloak (all aspect detection proof) can be employed by a player, active camouflage is hereby banned.
5) No materials which allow for ultra light, ultra strong, with huge payloads (ones which exceed current weapon capacity of equal size by multiples, for example the T-50 currently has the largest internal weapons bay of fifth generation aircraft, a tactical aircraft of this size could not weigh half as much and carry 20 internal weapons as opposed to the T-50s ten). Additionally these materials may not be used as justification to make range levels which seem unreasonably high with compared to current top tier aircraft of similar size and role.

2. Nuclear attacks on nations under 20k NS in-game: Any nation under 20k NS in-game can not be attacked with nuclear weapons unless they are 1. developing or own chemical, biological, area-effect EMP weapons, 2. own nukes and/or a Manhattan Project in-game, 3. ask a larger player to nuke someone.

3. In cases where GMs are in conflict with each other, or are otherwise compromised, GMs may now elect amongst themselves with a unanimous vote a temporary neutral fourth GM who's sole responsibility will be arbitrating that particular dispute.


5. GMs involved in a war will not be allowed to roll during that war unless specifically requested by the opposing side to said GM.


Conclusion

As a general summation:

-No Ruling will be given on an unclear issue without all sides being publicly heard from.

-It is the responsibility of interested parties to provide the evidence and arguments necessary to understanding a case. We cannot be expected to do the investigative leg work over an issue that those who are actually involved in understand the best. The most efficient way to obtain the facts is for those who know them to come forward.

-The GM`s will not take any abuse. There will be disagreements, and if you find that you disagree with us then politely point out what you believe to be flaws. Any unwarranted abuse will not be looked kindly upon.

-Many GM discussions are done on irc, upon request full logs on a specific subject will be provided.

Edited by Centurius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Requesting a ruling for an auto-advance on this [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=105130&st=0&p=2798859&fromsearch=1&#entry2798859]thread[/url], as Cochin and Lynneth, as well as JEDCJT has proceeded with moves against the Holy American Empire. Noting that, I am requesting an auto-advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='TheShammySocialist' timestamp='1316965285' post='2808153']
Requesting a ruling for an auto-advance on this [url=http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=105130&st=0&p=2798859&fromsearch=1&#entry2798859]thread[/url], as Cochin and Lynneth, as well as JEDCJT has proceeded with moves against the Holy American Empire. Noting that, I am requesting an auto-advance.
[/quote]

Considering the lack of an ic reply while maintaining a proven activity on the forums themselves the request for an auto advance is granted. Please rp reasonable losses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, the advance by me and Cochin was approved by Shadow via PM. In addition, it's technically not an autoadvance - just the first attacks.
He told us he could facilitate the war this weekend. :V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I'm getting to the responses. It's a bit slow going since I have exams to study for and (at least) three separate advances to contend with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OP updated to reflect current GM team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In consultation with my fellow GMs I am posting the following new rules regarding the use of custom air craft:

1) All custom aircraft used in combat must have stats accompanying them which are reviewable and accessible before they are used in combat. These stats must be reasonably comprehensive.
2) All custom aircraft which are employing yet to be serviced technology must be defendable by some semi-mature science and links which can show there is a reasonable chance to see it in production service by your tech year capped of course at 2031.
3) While all aspect ultra stealth aircraft and hypersonic aircraft are feasible by advanced nations, it is not feasible to have aircraft that do both of these "near perfect"
4) No uber cloak (all aspect detection proof) can be employed by a player, active camouflage is hereby banned.
5) No materials which allow for ultra light, ultra strong, with huge payloads (ones which exceed current weapon capacity of equal size by multiples, for example the T-50 currently has the largest internal weapons bay of fifth generation aircraft, a tactical aircraft of this size could not weigh half as much and carry 20 internal weapons as opposed to the T-50s ten). Additionally these materials may not be used as justification to make range levels which seem unreasonably high with compared to current top tier aircraft of similar size and role.

These guidelines we feel are fair and will help keep a growing gap between mid tier and top tier nations. GM units neither shall be immune from these rulings. All stat changes to bring these units into compliance may have immediate IC effect. That is to say you can't take someone's air force out of commission for 3 months by challenging them in here and force them to ground it and do maintenance.

Current suspected violators of these rules will be contacted over the next few weeks to initiate changes and defend their units in an amicable and professional manner.

It is important to note, future units are not going to need to be pre-GM approved, but can be placed under review just like in times passed. This will just give everyone a better idea of the guidelines we will be using. Other types of units may come under similar scrutiny if we see a problem or there is a need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Confirming the ruling, also in line with the existence of a dedicated GM channel the team will as of now offer relevant logs to discussions and rulings upon request by any member of the community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you post a link to the community discussion that led to this ruling?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Community has voted for tech restrictions (i.e. the time scale), same way under the old 2020 one lasers onboard planes were banned. We as GMs chose to setup these rules before we struck down one specific plane which may well violate the 2031 time scale.

GMs decided to contact the specific plane privately but here is the rest of the log:

[quote]
Triyun: actually
[2:48pm] Triyun: I have a proposal
[2:48pm] Triyun: before we go after just one aircraft
[2:48pm] Centurius: I'm listening
[2:49pm] Triyun: and I know one of mine could get hit by this. If you fly a custom unit, have some general outline of what it can do first of all. Secondly we should base it on what is feasibly possible as a production aircraft by 2030, we know roughly what that is today I think.
[2:49pm] Triyun: There is some novelty involved
[2:50pm] Centurius: I'd say we need to cut down on the metamaterials
[2:50pm] Centurius: and active camouflage on aircraft seems unlikely on a production model
[2:51pm] Triyun: mmm thats probably true
[2:51pm] cochin: mmhmm
[2:51pm] Triyun: same with hypersonics (save for interceptors, not air superiority)
[2:51pm] Centurius: yeah, well people could have hypersonic fighters
[2:51pm] Centurius: but it'd be either hypersonic or stealth
[2:51pm] Triyun: yes
[2:51pm] Centurius: not both at the same time
[2:52pm] cochin: point
[2:52pm] Triyun: so
[2:52pm] Triyun: do you want to post up these general outlines and then PM members individually?
[2:53pm] Centurius: cochin what's your take on it?
[2:53pm] cochin: I agree with the point on hypersonics/stealth
[2:53pm] cochin: and yeah active camouflaged seems not possible but of course thermal shielding is possible
[2:54pm] Triyun: I think its possible for turbofan units
[2:54pm] Triyun: the question is Mach 3+ to a large extent
[2:55pm] cochin: yeah, the exhaust thermal signature would be quite considerable
[2:55pm] Triyun: yeah
[2:55pm] Triyun: not to mention the friction
[2:55pm] Triyun: on the body
[2:56pm] Centurius: exhaust shielding is okay cochin
[2:56pm] Centurius: I strictly am referring to active camouflage
[2:56pm] cochin: yes
[2:58pm] Triyun: mmm
[2:59pm] Triyun: So for rules:
[2:59pm] Triyun: 1) If you fly customs you need to have them written down somewhere before you use them in battle.
[2:59pm] cochin: +1
[3:00pm] Triyun: 2) Aircraft must be shown to meet production feasibility by 2030 based on some substantive evidence.
[3:00pm] Triyun: aka
[3:00pm] Triyun: Mael can't say
[3:00pm] Triyun: he came up with something brilliant
[3:00pm] Triyun:
[3:00pm] cochin: yeah, at least some RL tech link should be presented
[3:00pm] Triyun: 3) While stealth and hypersonic are both feasible, they cannot be perfect together.
[3:01pm] • cochin nods
[3:01pm] Triyun: 4) No uber cloak (all aspect detection proof) or active camouflage
[3:02pm] Triyun: Also regarding some RL tech link, I'd like to also say that it should be semi-mature tech. Like it shouldn't be a novel one time laboratory thing
[3:02pm] Triyun: Oh and one last thing: No ultra light ultra strong materials that allow for unreasonable levels of armament and range
[3:03pm] Centurius: I agree
[3:03pm] Centurius: with the entire set
[3:03pm] cochin: me too
[3:03pm] Triyun: ok
[3:03pm] Centurius: well Triyun, feel free to post it up
[3:03pm] Triyun: will do
[3:04pm] cochin: of course if people feel that their technology is being opposed under this ruling they should be given the opportunity to present their argument before it is banned.
[3:04pm] cochin: after all there may be technological advancements we may not know about
[3:04pm] Centurius: Of course
[3:04pm] Triyun: yes
[3:04pm] Centurius: all gm rulings are challengeable
[3:05pm] cochin: The rules would come into force but individual cases should be given chance to present their arguments before rulings made on them
[3:06pm] Centurius: yeah
[3:07pm] Centurius: also as a general rule I think we should allow people to ask for relevant logs from this channel upon request
[3:08pm] cochin: okay, but I wont be able to make or maintain logs. mibbit,
[3:08pm] Centurius: yeah no problem
[3:08pm] Centurius: I have mIRC
[3:21pm] Triyun: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=105517&view=findpost&p=2814727 [/quote]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The rule was already there, this is a gm clarification on that rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1317669675' post='2814727']
1) All custom aircraft used in combat must have stats accompanying them which are reviewable and accessible before they are used in combat. These stats must be reasonably comprehensive.
[/quote]

Excellent, I agree.

[quote]2) All custom aircraft which are employing yet to be serviced technology must be defendable by some semi-mature science and links which can show there is a reasonable chance to see it in production service by your tech year capped of course at 2031. [/quote]

Enforcing the tech year cap with actual scientific quasi-proofs is a move in the right direction. However, when you mean must be defendable does that mean only when someone questions the aircraft's feasibility? Or should they be posted with the accompanying stats as fluff? Links with naked stats?

[quote]
3) While all aspect ultra stealth aircraft and hypersonic aircraft are feasible by advanced nations, it is not feasible to have aircraft that do both of these "near perfect"[/quote]
To be honest, all aspect ultra stealth alone isn't quite possible at all. All aircraft will leave vortex trails in their wake, and infrared emissions from skin friction (while more prevalent during higher speeds) are still detectable by specialized EO/IRST sensors.

[quote]4) No uber cloak (all aspect detection proof) can be employed by a player, active camouflage is hereby banned.[/quote]

You mean on aircraft? Or active camoflage at all? I really do think such a blanket ban (something of this magnitude would be railguns/lasers/mechs) should have had a discussion of sorts before being made a rule. Does this backing of scientific quasi-proofs clause apply here?

[quote]5) No materials which allow for ultra light, ultra strong, with huge payloads (ones which exceed current weapon capacity of equal size by multiples, for example the T-50 currently has the largest internal weapons bay of fifth generation aircraft, a tactical aircraft of this size could not weigh half as much and carry 20 internal weapons as opposed to the T-50s ten). Additionally these materials may not be used as justification to make range levels which seem unreasonably high with compared to current top tier aircraft of similar size and role.

These guidelines we feel are fair and will help keep a growing gap between mid tier and top tier nations. GM units neither shall be immune from these rulings. All stat changes to bring these units into compliance may have immediate IC effect. That is to say you can't take someone's air force out of commission for 3 months by challenging them in here and force them to ground it and do maintenance.

Current suspected violators of these rules will be contacted over the next few weeks to initiate changes and defend their units in an amicable and professional manner.

It is important to note, future units are not going to need to be pre-GM approved, but can be placed under review just like in times passed. This will just give everyone a better idea of the guidelines we will be using. Other types of units may come under similar scrutiny if we see a problem or there is a need.
[/quote]

These dialogues will be public in either the GM's Court or the tech help/complaints thread, right? You'd kill two birds with one stone, making violators explain themselves and change if required, AND give everyone a better idea of the guidelines you're using.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1317697000' post='2815406']
Enforcing the tech year cap with actual scientific quasi-proofs is a move in the right direction. However, when you mean must be defendable does that mean only when someone questions the aircraft's feasibility? Or should they be posted with the accompanying stats as fluff? Links with naked stats?[/quote]

If you are posting something more controversial links would be helpful. But they will be asked if something is challenged.


[quote]To be honest, all aspect ultra stealth alone isn't quite possible at all. All aircraft will leave vortex trails in their wake, and infrared emissions from skin friction (while more prevalent during higher speeds) are still detectable by specialized EO/IRST sensors.[/quote]

All Aspect Ultra Stealth is an industry term, it doesn't cover completely IR masking.



[quote]You mean on aircraft? Or active camoflage at all? I really do think such a blanket ban (something of this magnitude would be railguns/lasers/mechs) should have had a discussion of sorts before being made a rule. Does this backing of scientific quasi-proofs clause apply here?[/quote]

If you have something to refute it feel free to post it. This applies to aircraft. Active camouflage on tanks I am aware of, and thus wouldn't be covered by the ban.

[quote]These dialogues will be public in either the GM's Court or the tech help/complaints thread, right? You'd kill two birds with one stone, making violators explain themselves and change if required, AND give everyone a better idea of the guidelines you're using.
[/quote]

It depends on where people wish to discuss something, for convenience sake many like to use IRC and we're not adverse to using the medium. In such case dialogues can be posted on request.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1317697710' post='2815434']
If you are posting something more controversial links would be helpful. But they will be asked if something is challenged.
[/quote]

Gotcha.

[quote]All Aspect Ultra Stealth is an industry term, it doesn't cover completely IR masking.[/quote]

That's what I thought.


[quote]If you have something to refute it feel free to post it. This applies to aircraft. Active camouflage on tanks I am aware of, and thus wouldn't be covered by the ban.[/quote]

For aircraft? No, not really. I use a system thats pretty much used for anti-optical targeting, wouldn't make it blind to the eye perse. Basically to flicker against staring arrays.

But yeah, I thought this was a ban on active camo period.


[quote]
It depends on where people wish to discuss something, for convenience sake many like to use IRC and we're not adverse to using the medium. In such case dialogues can be posted on request.
[/quote]

Gotcha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm asking for a hold to be put in place on PresidentDavid's movements in the Pillar of Autumn thread (http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=105724). He has twice now done multiple moves without allowing other players to respond. There is simply no concievable way that he has fully pacified a state which just had open rebellion in less than a day and before my troops which are on the way even arrive. I'm not traversing an ocean here, I'm skimming the Gulf of Mexico, already had troops in the area, and already had resources in the area. I already mentioned it to him once that multiple moves would not be recognized, and that has been ignored, so now I am asking the GMs to place a hold on his movements. Some of us have a life and work overnight and only have a certain time of the day to post. That should not be abused to whip out 4 posts in a 4 hour span while others are sleeping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Pravus Ingruo' timestamp='1317706868' post='2815816']
I'm asking for a hold to be put in place on PresidentDavid's movements in the Pillar of Autumn thread (http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=105724). He has twice now done multiple moves without allowing other players to respond. There is simply no concievable way that he has fully pacified a state which just had open rebellion in less than a day and before my troops which are on the way even arrive. I'm not traversing an ocean here, I'm skimming the Gulf of Mexico, already had troops in the area, and already had resources in the area. I already mentioned it to him once that multiple moves would not be recognized, and that has been ignored, so now I am asking the GMs to place a hold on his movements. Some of us have a life and work overnight and only have a certain time of the day to post. That should not be abused to whip out 4 posts in a 4 hour span while others are sleeping.
[/quote]


[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1317707642' post='2815837']
Done.
[/quote]

K, I am on a direct border with Louisiana. I sent 30,000 troops in. He recognized it. I said [i]where[/i] the 30,000 troops went he didn't recognize it. I am trying to understand the logic in that. If you don't want to recognize the other 30,000 I sent from Dallas to the north then that is fine. But fail to see how saying where my troops went with RP is somehow overstepping my bounds when it is already accepted they are there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='PresidentDavid' timestamp='1317726782' post='2815982']
K, I am on a direct border with Louisiana. I sent 30,000 troops in. He recognized it. I said [i]where[/i] the 30,000 troops went he didn't recognize it. I am trying to understand the logic in that. If you don't want to recognize the other 30,000 I sent from Dallas to the north then that is fine. But fail to see how saying where my troops went with RP is somehow overstepping my bounds when it is already accepted they are there.
[/quote]

It's not you saying where they are. It's you saying they are EVERYWHERE and have pacified THE ENTIRE STATE. You know how people Louisiana has (I'm going by RL census numbers since Shammy hadn't RP'd anything different)? 4,533,372. You sent in 30,000 troops. That's 151 citizens (some of whom had just supported an open rebellion and let's not forget the Cajun Federation's history/problems with terrorism) per soldier. So unless your dudes are super soldiers, you're not going to be everywhere and pacify everything in a day. Also, if you did go everywhere, then you're stupid. Now you're vastly outnumbered, a foreign power without the correct resources, and spread very, very thin. Didn't you wonder, even for a second, why I sent 220,000 troops into the area? Because it isn't pacified. And this is an area that I am familiar with, that my country has pacified and protected before. Long before you were even around. Let's ask ourselves a logical question: who would the people trust more? A stable, older nation that previously protected them through prosperity before granting them independence that unfortunately didn't work out, or a brand new, technologically deficient nation that is woefully under prepared to serve their needs? Obviously there is a problem there. A disconnect.

I accepted that your troops are already in the STATE of Louisiana. Did I accept that they are everywhere? No.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PD you have a significant time advantage in occupying the state that PI does not. However that does not mean you can do so completely without giving PI a chance to intervene. At minimum he could use air power to destroy bridges and other transit to retard your progress. I am not sure if he'd do that but you need to give him a chance to respond rather than claim complete pacification.

That said PI's previous claims versus PDs current claims are not going to enjoy any special validity amongst the people of the former Cajun Federation. Neither side can claim loyalty of the citizenry, instead simply RP the contest out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1317759201' post='2816339']
PD you have a significant time advantage in occupying the state that PI does not. However that does not mean you can do so completely without giving PI a chance to intervene. At minimum he could use air power to destroy bridges and other transit to retard your progress. I am not sure if he'd do that but you need to give him a chance to respond rather than claim complete pacification.

That said PI's previous claims versus PDs current claims are not going to enjoy any special validity amongst the people of the former Cajun Federation. Neither side can claim loyalty of the citizenry, instead simply RP the contest out.
[/quote]

Okay then thanks. I think me and PI can work it out from here. I don't want the land there is just something I want to do there. I'll message him and we'll talk.

EDIT: I was just thinking that it takes about 3.5 hours to get from Houston to Lafayette and about 5 or 6 to get from Houston to Baton Rouge. With the time I posted in between the posts I figured in RP time that was enough to get there. I apologize. I thought y'all were arguing that I didn't give my troops enough time to set up but the argument is that I didn't give chance PI to reply back. I see now. Edited by PresidentDavid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am aware that I was not allowed to make my earlier post of moving my 30,000 troops into Louisiana in strategic locations however he can do this?

"The entire 1st Army and half of the 3rd Army, 80,000 troops, landed near Bashman Bayou and Bayou Dupree and made a beeline west for Route 39. Once there, they would head north-northwest through the Lower Ninth Ward and into the city of New Orleans. Once there, they would pick up the I-10 freeway westbound until they hit the west side of the city. Heavy armor would be moved around under the Highway 90 and I-10 bridges into Lake Pontchartrain and landed into the city proper to provide armor support.

Airports were given primary importance to allow the seven squadrons of the ENS Empire to land, along with moving in land-based squadrons from the Empire proper. Those seven squadrons immediately scrambled to provide air cover for the entire operation, and those 84 planes would effectively control the airspace over southern Louisiana and Mississippi.

The remaining 35,000 troops would move west along the Louisiana coast before moving in to land at Cypremort Point. From there, they would move north, along with heavy armor support, along the Route 319 and Route 87 into New Iberia. "

I just don't understand how he can move 115,000 troops by sea faster then I can move 60,000 troops by land. I was not even given time to react when he went through Dixie Waters or through Louisiana waters.

EDIT: He being Pravus

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=105724 Edited by PresidentDavid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Notice my use of the future tense. "Once there, they would", they "would" do this, they "would" do that. None of it "has" been done, which is the qualifying difference from your posts. You said "it's all done". I've left plenty of room for you to respond. I even put in contingencies for running into your troops, if you read the post.

Also, react in the waters with what? You have no navy. I mentioned blowing through Confederacy waters at flank speed, diplomatic consequences be damned (their waters are so small anyways, barely time to engage). Are you seriously suggesting that some brown water cutter is going to annoy my biggest and most powerful fleet? If anything, they'd be run right over.

In conclusion, the only places where my troops actually had boots on the ground is that Triumph place, east of New Orleans on the Bayou, and the third place I mentioned. Oh, and the air cover. They haven't done anything else yet, so I'm really not seeing what there is to !@#$%* about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pravus Ingruo would be correct as the way his post is written leaves room for response whereas your post didn't. The subtle difference between godmodding and writing a story is the use of future tense within reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1317828043' post='2817100']
Pravus Ingruo would be correct as the way his post is written leaves room for response whereas your post didn't. The subtle difference between godmodding and writing a story is the use of future tense within reason.
[/quote]
I seem to remember a certain war when everyone was up in arms over a post in future tense, particularly when the post had the condition "should there be no opposition". I'm inclined to severely limit future tense to like the next 12~24 hours, for basic standardization.

That's my take on the issue. "Reason" is not neutral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1317830489' post='2817115']
I seem to remember a certain war when everyone was up in arms over a post in future tense, particularly when the post had the condition "should there be no opposition". I'm inclined to severely limit future tense to like the next 12~24 hours, for basic standardization.

That's my take on the issue. "Reason" is not neutral.
[/quote]

You can't put a hard limit on something which depends on a case-by-case basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now